PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on National Parks, Forests and Public Lands.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Mar 16, 2012
Grand Canyon Tourism Jobs Protection Act of 2012 - Declares that the substantial restoration of the natural quiet and experience of the Grand Canyon National Park in Arizona shall be considered to be achieved in the Park if, for at least 75% of every day, half of the Park is free of sound produced by commercial air tour operations that have an allocation to conduct such tours in the Park.
Prohibits the Secretary from considering sound produced by sources other than commercial air tour operations when: (1) making recommendations, developing a final plan, or issuing regulations related to commercial air tour operations in the Park; or (2) determining whether substantial restoration of the natural quiet and experience of the Park has been achieved.
Requires the Secretary to continuously monitor noise from aircraft operating over the Park below 17,999 feet MSL to ensure compliance with such substantial restoration in the Park.
People & committees
Rep. Gosar, Paul A. [R-AZ-1] · R–AZ
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the Subcommittee on National Parks, Forests and Public Lands.
Referred to the House Committee on Natural Resources.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Aug 14, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.R.4198 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.R.4198 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.R.4198 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.R.4198 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.